Current:Home > StocksHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -ValueCore
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-16 01:16:08
The Supreme Court decided 6-3 and 6-2 that race-conscious admission policies of the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution, effectively bringing to an end to affirmative action in higher education through a decision that will reverberate across campuses nationwide.
The rulings fell along ideological lines. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for both cases, and Justice Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh wrote concurring opinions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has ties to Harvard and recused herself in that case, but wrote a dissent in the North Carolina case.
The ruling is the latest from the Supreme Court's conservative majority that has upended decades of precedent, including overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022.
- Read the full text of the decision
Here's how the justices split on the affirmative action cases:
Supreme Court justices who voted against affirmative action
The court's six conservatives formed the majority in each cases. Roberts' opinion was joined by Thomas, Samuel Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The chief justice wrote that Harvard and UNC's race-based admission guidelines "cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause."
"Respondents' race-based admissions systems also fail to comply with the Equal Protection Clause's twin commands that race may never be used as a 'negative' and that it may not operate as a stereotype," Roberts wrote. "The First Circuit found that Harvard's consideration of race has resulted in fewer admissions of Asian-American students. Respondents' assertion that race is never a negative factor in their admissions programs cannot withstand scrutiny. College admissions are zerosum, and a benefit provided to some applicants but not to others necessarily advantages the former at the expense of the latter. "
Roberts said that prospective students should be evaluated "as an individual — not on the basis of race," although universities can still consider "an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise."
Supreme Court justices who voted to uphold affirmative action
The court's three liberals all opposed the majority's decision to reject race as a factor in college admissions. Sotomayor's dissent was joined by Justice Elena Kagan in both cases, and by Jackson in the UNC case. Both Sotomayor and Kagan signed onto Jackson's dissent as well.
Sotomayor argued that the admissions processes are lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
"The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment enshrines a guarantee of racial equality," Sotomayor wrote. "The Court long ago concluded that this guarantee can be enforced through race-conscious means in a society that is not, and has never been, colorblind."
In her dissent in the North Carolina case, Jackson recounted the long history of discrimination in the U.S. and took aim at the majority's ruling.
"With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces 'colorblindness for all' by legal fiat," Jackson wrote. "But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life."
Melissa Quinn contributed to this report.
- In:
- Affirmative Action
- Supreme Court of the United States
veryGood! (3222)
Related
- The Best Stocking Stuffers Under $25
- Arrest made in 2001 cold case murder of University of Georgia law student Tara Baker
- Cavaliers crash back to earth as Celtics grab 2-1 lead in NBA playoffs series
- U.S. weapons may have been used in ways inconsistent with international law in Gaza, U.S. assessment says
- Federal court filings allege official committed perjury in lawsuit tied to Louisiana grain terminal
- The Flores agreement has protected migrant children for nearly 3 decades. Changes may be coming.
- 1 of 3 teens charged with killing a Colorado woman while throwing rocks at cars pleads guilty
- NYC policy on how long migrant families can stay in shelters was ‘haphazard,’ audit finds
- Juan Soto to be introduced by Mets at Citi Field after striking record $765 million, 15
- Sneak(er)y Savings: A Guide to Hidden Hoka Discounts and 57% Off Deals
Ranking
- Retirement planning: 3 crucial moves everyone should make before 2025
- Denver Nuggets change complexion of series with Game 3 demolition of Minnesota Timberwolves
- NWSL will be outlier now that WNBA is switching to charter flights for entire season
- As NFL's most scrutinized draft pick, Falcons QB Michael Penix Jr. is ready for spotlight
- Charges tied to China weigh on GM in Q4, but profit and revenue top expectations
- A critically endangered newborn addax now calls Disney's Animal Kingdom home: Watch video
- Israel orders new evacuations in Gaza’s last refuge of Rafah as it expands military offensive
- WABC Radio suspends Rudy Giuliani for flouting ban on discussing discredited 2020 election claims
Recommendation
A Mississippi company is sentenced for mislabeling cheap seafood as premium local fish
Chris Pine Reflects on Losing Out on The O.C. Role Due to His Bad Acne
The Best Walking Pads & Under-Desk Treadmills for Your Home Office Space
As NFL's most scrutinized draft pick, Falcons QB Michael Penix Jr. is ready for spotlight
Intellectuals vs. The Internet
Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Ladies First
New 'A Quiet Place: Day One' trailer: Watch Lupita Nyong'o, Joseph Quinn flee alien attack
On 'SNL,' Maya Rudolph's Beyoncé still can't slay Mikey Day's 'Hot Ones' spicy wings